[clug] Why isn't Java popular on the Linux Desktop?

[Daniel Pittman]

Sam Couter <sam at couter.id.au> writes:
> Daniel Pittman <daniel at rimspace.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, some of the problems; locating compatible versions of libraries and
>> handling changes to ABI between library releases is still an issue for Java
>> software.
>
> And it's solved (in Debian, at least) the same way as for native libraries:
> compatibility breaking changes need a new version number, and the version is
> included in the jar file name.

*nod*  OTOH, it is also causing problems for the Java release team, because it
vastly increases their costs, and because they can't just ship a standard
classpath that contains all the various libraries.

>> One of the big distribution problems it faces in Debian, for example, is
>> that most packaged library releases change ABI between versions, so release
>> 1.0 and 1.1 are not compatible.
>
> That's a problem with any language.

It can be, certainly.  Some languages (hi, Ruby) seem to be more prone to this
than others, which is admittedly a cultural thing.  In the context of the
discussion, though, I think it is a relevant cultural thing. :)

>> This leads to many Java software packages shipping all their dependencies
>> as compiled Java code along with the application
>
> For application developers who don't care about Debian, this is the easiest
> way to have a downloadable bundle that Just Works. As you note, it makes it
> hard for Debian and other distribution vendors to provide a better, more
> integrated experience.

We are in violent agreement here.

Regards,
        Daniel
-- 
✣ Daniel Pittman            ✉ daniel at rimspace.net            ☎ +61 401 155 707
               ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons